Can you give a link to the paper?Well when I had a paper accepted after peer review for an international conference I was accepted as one. I don't know that such has changed over the past few years. I still get cited as one occasionally.
Can you give a link to the paper?Well when I had a paper accepted after peer review for an international conference I was accepted as one. I don't know that such has changed over the past few years. I still get cited as one occasionally.
1 John was likely written at least 20 years after 1 Thessalonians, so I doubt Paul was referencing it. But also, this passage is not really saying anything different, Paul and John are agreeing. But neither passage references scripture as the means of testing and again, even if they would reference scripture, what we call the New Testament would not have qualified at such an early date. Scripture at that time was our Old Testament, plausibly plus a few books that are not commonly included, and maybe not all of our OT.
You are the one who rejects the truth. You do not know the true nature of salvation. You do not know what it means to be born again. How can something born of God die? Do you know what eternal means? Do you not know that believers have the life of Christ, which is indestructible? Do you not know the meaning of indestructible?
You have a wrong concept of salvation. You stick to it even when God's word proves you wrong. And you have the hide to criticise those who reject your false assertions.
Actually, I talk to other biblical scholars and ask them if I am wrong. With very few exceptions they confirm what I am saying. Many times I am quoting well-respected biblical scholars.
I am not saying that the bible is filled with mistakes either, nor that people are wrong about God. What I am saying is that we are sometimes misunderstanding what the Bible says, and given the number of disagreements in the discussions I read here, there is a lot of disagreement about what the Bible means, so how can I be wrong when I say that sometimes people are misunderstanding it? Please explain how one person supporting OSAS and one opposing it can both be correct in their understanding.
That’s overstating your case. There are many things not supported in Scripture that are nevertheless true and real. What matters is whether the Bible contradicts a particular view.It’s simple, really! The Bible doesn’t support OSAS so it’s heretical.
This is an excellent point.That’s overstating your case. There are many things not supported in Scripture that are nevertheless true and real. What matters is whether the Bible contradicts a particular view.
You seem to be overanalyzing things. I’m merely quoting Scripture about certain subjects, and it would seem it’s flying over you.
We only have today to understand His word, it doesn’t matter what they had yesterday (eons ago). Today is all that matters! The Bible is complete so we must live with this.
Besides, the apostles, God’s chosen, knew the Truth via the Holy Spirit teaching them. God wrote down things through them; the Bible is inspired/ God breathed (ie. Men did not write the Bible on their own).
John says to test the spirits, Paul says to test. Now since you are not adding to scripture, which of those statements tells us how to test, or what to use, remember you claimed we need to use scripture? But Satan is a spirit and he used scripture against Jesus. Which of those statements tells us that what John or Paul wrote even qualifies as scripture? The New Testament canon was not formalized for another 300 years and there were extensive debates over which works would qualify, for instance, the "Shepherd" was widely accepted in the East while "Revelation" was more accepted in the West, and due to politics, "Revelation" won out. The "Didache" and "1 Clement" were ruled out because they did not have apostolic authorship, but apostolic authorship had to be invented for "Hebrews" to get it in.
That’s overstating your case. There are many things not supported in Scripture that are nevertheless true and real. What matters is whether the Bible contradicts a particular view.
That God wrote things down through people is certainly one POSSIBLE interpretation of "theopneustos" but not the only one. We simply do not know with any certainty just what Paul meant when he invented the term instead of using the previously used term, although that was likely avoided for political reasons.
As for the Apostles knowing the truth through the Holy Spirit, Acts indicates that the Apostles were sometimes rather hard to convince of the truth, even when the Holy Spirit was attempting to teach, so care must be used in citing them.
As for the Bible being complete, I know that the RCC considers the Bible complete, I am not certain if any other denomination has made that determination though. I know of several that have specifically not closed the canon though.
Thus, it appears that you are making several statements of faith that you wish to present as statements of absolute truth, and they are not.
John says to test the spirits, Paul says to test. Now since you are not adding to scripture, which of those statements tells us how to test, or what to use, remember you claimed we need to use scripture? But Satan is a spirit and he used scripture against Jesus. Which of those statements tells us that what John or Paul wrote even qualifies as scripture? The New Testament canon was not formalized for another 300 years and there were extensive debates over which works would qualify, for instance, the "Shepherd" was widely accepted in the East while "Revelation" was more accepted in the West, and due to politics, "Revelation" won out. The "Didache" and "1 Clement" were ruled out because they did not have apostolic authorship, but apostolic authorship had to be invented for "Hebrews" to get it in.
Then I’m sorry for you in not believing Scripture.
-“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,”
II Timothy 3:16 NKJV
-There are plethora of Scriptures indicating that He teaches us things:
“And I have filled him with the Spirit of God, in wisdom, in understanding, in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship, to design artistic works, to work in gold, in silver, in bronze, in cutting jewels for setting, in carving wood, and to work in all manner of workmanship.”
Exodus 31:3-5 NKJV
-Prophecy never came by the will of man:
“for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”
II Peter 1:21 NKJV
Nuclear fusion. Microwaves. Internal combustion engines.Can you give me examples of things not supported by Scripture?
Nuclear fusion. Microwaves. Internal combustion engines.
Why would a loving God+Jesus+Holy Spirit not automatically protect you? Remember Jesus parable of the 100 sheep and the power to find and return it? If the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is powerless to protect you from these things, what is the purpose? Do you believe those "led astray" are subject to a greater power than than God? What is the answer of "If God is for us, who can be against us? The question seem to assumes we live in a power equilibrium between God and Satan with both holding equal power.
I reject that assumption or proposition.
Then I’m sorry for you in not believing Scripture.
-“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,”
II Timothy 3:16 NKJV
-There are plethora of Scriptures indicating that He teaches us things:
“And I have filled him with the Spirit of God, in wisdom, in understanding, in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship, to design artistic works, to work in gold, in silver, in bronze, in cutting jewels for setting, in carving wood, and to work in all manner of workmanship.”
Exodus 31:3-5 NKJV
-Prophecy never came by the will of man:
“for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”
II Peter 1:21 NKJV
Nuclear fusion. Microwaves. Internal combustion engines.